Hacker News Comments on
Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order by Ray Dalio
Principles by Ray Dalio
·
Youtube
·
84
HN points
·
17
HN comments
- This course is unranked · view top recommended courses
Hacker News Stories and Comments
All the comments and stories posted to Hacker News that reference this video.Not if you're invested in it. Not if you want to see blockchain technology used to replace the DTCC. Not if you think there are potentially extreme differences between crime (laws enforced by power) and justice (what is ethically right or wrong).The people who invest in crypto are rent-seeking parasites hoping to extract value while incidentally providing liquidity to the Chinese miners blowing non trivial amounts of co2 in the air. The people who transact in crypto are actually building it and working towards the crypto dream of alternative currency.
It's important to understand that when a company sells a stock, they get money that they can then use to grow themselves. So there is generally some of the principal "retained" in a unit of stock, particularly because the unit of stock also creates a legal relationship with the company.
By definition all crypto starts from a miner, so when you buy a unit of crypto, you are transferring money directly to the miner. So the unit of crypto retains none of the principal investment.
That is an absolute terrifying property.
I am not quite sure what I think of ETH yet, since it's a little different, but BTC is straight bad for the environment.
There are also arguments to be made that alternative currencies not controlled by a centralized government are an important endeavor. If governments have a monopoly on management of currency, then it can be expected that they abuse monopoly power. The distance between policy and reality can be measured in suffering. The idea of a non centralized currency is that there is just the market and the reality of the market. Systemically enforced reality is an appealing property.
The government inflates a currency to (regressively) tax idle money while simultaneously de-valuing debt. That's not necessarily a good thing. It allows for unsustainable largess and directly creates boom and bust cycles. Here's some good fun from the last recession: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0nERTFo-Sk Here's a pretty unsettling video about inflation and geopolitics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xguam0TKMw8
Just as a disclaimer, I am a complete layman when it comes to finance and economics.
⬐ dsqOkay, I understand the advantage of having a currency which is completely independent from the government. I suppose like everything there's always some good and some bad.
You should be asking this to yourself at least yearly regardless of your country. Your personal well being has everything to do with the neighbourhood you live in. Think of this as the 'crane factor'. If things are being built, you're not declining. I have a larger costco being built by me right now :)If you believe your neighbourhood is in decline, you must move. Perhaps this means you move to a new city within your country, which is much easier than a new country.But if your country is the one in decline you have to go to this further pain of moving to a new country.
If you believe America is a sinking ship. Move. You can't really listen to other's advice.
>For the first time, America can no longer take its lead for granted. As it seems, China is doing well. Ray Dalio writes extensively on this topic in his novel The Changing World Order.
Ray Dalio is an agent/operative who forced the hands of the enemy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xguam0TKMw8
His assertion at say 7:48 the USA has gone over the peak and it's aimed downward now. That you need to do things like forgive student debt. Which happened right?
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GDPC1
Wait where is the USA on the graph? Oh they are for sure before the peak? Why did Ray dalio intentionally misrepresent?
⬐ eesmithWhy not ask yourself what you can do to help prevent the ship from sinking?In a real sinking ship, people on board can bail. They can man the pumps. They can close and secure water-tight doors. They can used wedges and a hammer to block the openings (as Tom Scott tried at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXC6U0NfJg8 ).
"If not for the courage of the fearless crew, the Minnow would be lost."
If the Minnow had a life boat, should the Skipper and Gilligan have fled in it, and left the passengers behind?
A neighborhood where everyone only watches out for themself and leaves at the first sign of trouble isn't really a neighborhood, merely a place name for transient housing.
⬐ jpolitzkiWhat did you mean by the comment that Ray Dalio is an agent?And I believe the graphs are a collection of data inputs like education quality and debt or whatnot, so GDP isn't full representative, although our growth has slowed at the minimum.
Fiat works until it doesn't. Whether that's inflation, corrupt government, or the long term debt cycle which we nearing the end of.Ray Dalio has a good video about what that means and how this has played out every time over the past 500 years:
⬐ arcticbullThis is the same thing that William DeVane has been saying shilling gold for Rosland Capital at 2am to Fox viewers for the last decade. I'm not worried. [1]Dalio is talking his book.
⬐ ericdIt’s his book because he believes it’s true, not because he’s trying to influence things. I’d highly recommend reading Big Debt Crises.⬐ arcticbullSorry, when I said "talking his book" that's like a finance term for advocating for things that would benefit the positions you hold.> Talking your book is a phrase used to describe what portfolio managers are doing when they discuss their portfolio holdings. It is generally assumed that this discussion is to create interest (and buyers) of these securities. This will ultimately benefit the price of the security and the manager’s portfolio.
[1] https://abnormalreturns.com/2010/02/18/everybody-talks-their...
⬐ ericdSorry for the poor wording of my response, I knew what you meant. I meant that he’s invested the way he is because he believes in what he’s talking about in terms of macro trends. And then I confusingly recommended reading his printed book, which I’ve found very helpful in understanding what the central banks have been doing, and allowed me to be well positioned for this inflation well before it picked up to where it is now.
Ray Dalio has a great educational video on the history of debt and how nations always end up dealing with it.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xguam0TKMw8
We know how this story ends, yet we seem helpless to do something different. Why?
⬐ waynenilsenincorrect incentive structure⬐ CyberDildonicsBecause the negative consequences of inflation and disdain for inflation are not felt by the people who create it.
Great piece. Most MBAs learn this in b-school. This is wonderfully paired with this video (from Ray Dalio) --> which draws analogs to this process on the macro / country level https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xguam0TKMw8
Ray Dalio wrote a book theorizing about some of these possibilities. I haven't read it yet but this video summary of it is pretty interesting.
I'm not that familiar with the Fourth Turning and this also originates from the US, but I did find it quite helpful when considering where things are, have been and might be going and how the US is in a cycle along with other nations: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xguam0TKMw8I'd also not heard of Glocalization, but it reminds me of a couple of topics that are covered in Fritjof Capra's Systems View of Life book (also a course), around emergent behaviour in complex systems and how this competes with top down command and control ideas (or in organisations as the formal and informal networks).
No because the content does not “only get published” when the worst happens.You can find books, popular newspaper articles, etc that predicted the housing crash and some that even predicted the 07-08 timeline.
2022 video about changing world order: https://youtu.be/xguam0TKMw8
1997 article about leveraging worker insecurity to keep people in jobs: https://www.nytimes.com/1997/02/27/business/job-insecurity-o...
Accurate predictions are all over because human society is intentional, and physical reality has constraints. I predict you will die of dehydration if you stop drinking fluids.
Many things are certain despite all the uncertainty we feel.
Ray Dalio's Changing World Order is a good read. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xguam0TKMw8
⬐ wslhWith all due respect to you and Ray Dalio: Ray is examining patterns within a relative short timeframe and we can always expect a "this time is different" moment or we are in a radical shift in patterns, a black swan or whatever we like to call it. This is just an hypothesis: things follow a pattern until the pattern changes and we are living in an incredible moment when science and technology are accelerating and could solve many human problems that we see impossible now. US is in an incredible position if you compare it with other countries in the world.US has a lot of issues but we can see it as a platform offering more chances to succeed than other (countries) platforms. You don't need the entire population to succeed, with only a few outliers (Google, Facebook, open Source, an NGO) you can structurally change US and the entire world. I don't want to sound positive about US but more negative about other countries in the world. You cannot take apart the military aspect (even after disastrous wars) the weapons are there in the US. A crisis is completely possible but the gap between the US and other countries is amazing AND US is a talent atractor.
⬐ pclmulqdqI think Ray Dalio does a good job talking about the decline of the American empire, but I'm not sure his huge bets on the rise of China are well-placed. India also appears to have a good case for "next big empire" and it is often the case that when two world powers fight, they destroy each other. For example, the UK and Germany in WWII - the UK won the war, but ended up in huge financial trouble that caused its decline.⬐ mahastoreIndia and China had the highest GDP 250 years ago. So it is not surprising that they will grow back again.That necessarily does not mean USA people have to kill each other. There is enough room for global prosperity if only we have the patience and the right attitude. To start with - stop killing each other.⬐ XorNotThe problem is China's government supports just a monumental level of corruption and graft, and has been doing so by exploiting the "developing nation" growth boone.But that only works once: its days of 7-8% GDP growth year over year[1] are behind it and not coming back. The CCP government seems somewhat aware of this - the social credit system, internet firewall and various other police state measures seem to be an effort to "pre-oppress" the population once the growth levels off (or flat lines entirely) since the implied social contract of China has always been "tomorrow is better then today" - and that's all going to stop once the graft and corruption eats the much lower GDP growth which a developed nation has.
[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/263616/gross-domestic-pr...
⬐ XuMiaoUS was wiser than others because we were able to look at our mistakes and fix them admirably.It's only a weak character who tries to demonize others in exchange for self-comforting. Sadly, I'm seeing more and more people doing that.
⬐ tomrodI agree with your second paragraph, but see no relation to the comment preceding it. Can you please expound?
I tend to ignore the "endless screeching", and I've long had an optimistic world view somewhat aligned with say Steven Pinker -- we're living through the best times, roughly monotonic progress, with some temporary setbacks.But this recent video by Ray Dalio made me think a lot, and led me to his books: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xguam0TKMw8
Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order
He did a bunch of quantitative research and came up with a model for the prosperity of countries, and "the world order".
In the model, there were 4 world leaders at various points: Dutch, British, Americans, and Chinese. The basic pattern is that they were productive and industrious, gained military power, and grew to hold the world's reserve concurrency.
After they hold the world's reserve concurrency, they stop being as productive. The rich parents can bend the rules and corrupt society for their kids.
And there is more internal conflict about how to divvy up a fixed or declining pie. There can be more external conflict once rivals see weakness. In Dalio's view, China is obviously on the rise economically, and you also see signs of their increased military power.
There is more to it than that -- see the video and books, but that's my short summary.
-----
It sounds a little too "clean", but after some reflection, a lot of it is hard to argue with. (I'd definitely be interested in criticisms -- this presentation / framing is pretty new.)
This doesn't mean America is "collapsing". But I would now say it's clearly "declining". Our energies are directed more at fighting amongst ourselves than producing things.
It always boggled my mind that everything we buy is made in China -- how could that not have an effect? Well it does appear that having the world's reserve concurrency is a huge advantage. That was established long ago, before we were born, and now we're coasting off of it.
But then again, Britain and the Netherlands "declined" and they seem to be doing OK. They lost their empires, but they recovered to some degree of civilized society and prosperity.
And I'm pretty sure I would not want to live in China right now, e.g. especially with what I hear about the COVID lockdowns. (even though I'm ethnically Chinese)
But yeah I think I need to take the idea of decline a lot more seriously. I think the blog post is also "overcorrecting" from the screeching. I think what decline looks like is a bunch of little collapses in all areas of life, and people endlessly arguing about it, while doing little to correct it.
This video seems appropriate with the article:A friend recently shared this video “principles for dealing with the changing world order” which stirred up a very solemn feeling in me.
It may be the first time as an American that I felt a sense of duty to compete in regard to our international place. I’ve been wondering if any other Americans (and the west in general) wonder what they personally can do.
In the video, Ray Dalio suggests saving money (fiscal conservatism?), being nice (political tolerance?), and competing technologically.
If only it were that simple.
They will find a way around those laws. I think the end state of the US was described perfectly in Ray Dalio's "Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order by Ray Dalio" video: Namely, the elite will grab as much capital as they can and when the people finally wrestle back control, all that wealth will fly out of the country as it is collapsing. This is probably how they are operating.
⬐ andy_pppWhat I've always struggled to understand about Dalio's statements is how does Modern Monetary Theory fit into things? He seems to believe the government bank account works like a domestic household and my understanding is different. For example you can have as much debt as you like but because of inflation those debts will always be repayable as long as you never try to repay the government debt?I would say inflation has been prevented by Chinese manufacturing and recent inflation is being caused by price rises in shipping and problems with manufacturing (chip shortages), covid, increases in savings from people WFH for two years and not spending as much on going out, Chinese cost of manufacturing going up and obviously Ukraine and the sanctions against Russia.
We seem to be so sure of the causes of things but you can fit theories on top of history with astonishing ease, it's predicting the future that is difficult. Dalio has been saying we are due for a crash due to printing money for 10 years. Eventually he'll be proven right, but will it be down to the US debt pile or some of the other factors at play in the world. Who can say of sure?
⬐ rank0⬐ kelseyfrog> For example you can have as much debt as you like but because of inflation those debts will always be repayableIf this is true, then why is the government collecting any taxes at all? If any amount of debt is sustainable, I am livid that I have to work for the government 4 months/year.
Also, inflation is a terrible thing. It deeply widens the gap between the rich and the poor. Poor people don't have any assets. Their purchasing power evaporates while those with houses and equities greatly expand their net worth.
⬐ andy_pppTaxes reduce inflation… this is MMT not me saying this stuff. Believe it or not as I understand it spending happens before taxes are collected by the government magically creating the money from thin air.⬐ jlokier> If this is true, then why is the government collecting any taxes at all? If any amount of debt is sustainable, I am livid that I have to work for the government 4 months/year.If government services were paid for only by government borrowing instead of taxation, you'd still be "working for the government" for some share of your efforts. It would show up as increased inflation instead. (I think this "invisible taxation" would feel like a psychologically better deal to some people, even if everyone was worse off.)
It wouldn't be progressive as in "progressive taxation" any more. Removing progressive taxation has many effects, generally harming the poor more than than the rich and widening the gap between rich and poor, and as you note, general inflation has this effect as well.
So perhaps it's better for the government to collect taxes after all.
⬐ rank0Of course the government needs to collect taxes. My comment was a rhetorical one to illustrate the silliness of the idea “any amount of debt is fine”If that were REALLY true, it shouldn’t matter if the government does or does not collect taxes.
Not sure I’m explaining my self well… so to reiterate:
If any arbitrarily large deficit is acceptable, what would happen if tax revenue fell 90 percent? No sane person supports eliminating taxes…but lots of people believe the national debt can be infinite.
What a fun video regardless of whether it's correct or not. It comes across as an asmovian psychohistory and that's a fun lens to play with regardless of its utility.Assuming it's a useful model, where does that leave us? Basically with nothing. The author suggests "spending less than we make, and treating each other well." Or in other words, fiscal austerity and compromising with non-compromisers. If Dalio has examples of nations retreating from the inevitability of collapse, or engineering soft landings, he doesn't share it in the video. Either way, why should a system which inevitably results in big cycles stop producing big cycles. Of course each empire wants to avoid its demise. Wanting to avoid demise isn't a sufficient condition.
What I hoped Dalio would confront, was the possibility of changing cycle producing machine itself. You can start to see where this is going by identifying the change needed in each of the sub-components. Eliminate economic systems which create wealth gaps. Upend the global reserve system entirely. End Westphalian sovereignty. &c &c. Any or all of these naturally lead to big cycle formation and resistance toward changing the system creating big cycles is a tacit endorsement of the big cycle machine which I fully expect to receive (big cycles are good actually!) :)
⬐ ayngg⬐ lcallThe video itself is a super condensed version of his book primarily aimed at the Youtube audience demographic, the book it is based on probably goes much further into depth.⬐ kelseyfrogThe book's calls to action are as such:> Know all the possibilities, think about the worst-case scenarios, and then find ways to eliminate the intolerable ones.
> Diversify
> Put deferred gratification ahead of immediate gratification so you will be better off in the future.
> Triangulate among the smartest people possible
Each of these have varying degrees of paragraphs detailing their nuance, but they all come back to the point of making personal decisions to navigate a decline rather than changing the system of decline.
⬐ jstx1Is deferring gratification still sensible when the future is uncertain? The point is that you give up something in the present in order to get something in the future. But when the future is less reliable, it’s more likely that you’re giving up stuff for no future benefit.⬐ kelseyfrog⬐ aynggThat's right. Deferring gratification is deciding to pass on the mousseline sauce on an ill-fated voyage across the Atlantic. I'd much rather be focused on advancing safer modes of transport than worried about which lifeboat I'm going to head for.I think Dalio is choosing to focus on what the individual can do to navigate change one cannot control, which is a lot easier for individuals to do compared to what systemic change could be done to make changes for the better, which often requires massive resources, coordination and political capital not available to the average person. That sort of stuff is outside of the scope of what the book is about it seems.Honesty and the Golden Rule are always good principles, and can direct us to other good principles, when properly applied. (Treating other people the way oneself would want to be treated does not eliminate setting appropriate boundaries while still being respectfully kind as far as possible; or farther :) .) To be effective in doing that, yes, one should avoid debt and have a financial reserve, and further, emergency food & water reserves of at least basics for staying alive (wheat/grains, beans, water, salt?).And I think being honest and good to one's family and others pays long-term dividends that money and government cannot match.
⬐ _xanderA lot of this feels 'right' and Dalio obviously has proven his investing chops, but I'm a little nervous about the rigor behind these arguments. Can't see any citations in this video - which, fine, most Youtube videos don't - but then the book also lacks citations(!)Also find it strange that the video references how polarisation is about redistributing vs maintaining the status quo, when we've seen in recent years that both sides are talking just as much about redistributing away from elites, at least in rhetoric
⬐ incomingpain⬐ nimbius>A lot of this feels 'right' and Dalio obviously has proven his investing chops, but I'm a little nervous about the rigor behind these arguments. Can't see any citations in this video - which, fine, most Youtube videos don't - but then the book also lacks citations(!)I think your confusion is that you're seeing this video for it's top layer.
The USA took over as world order leader in the 1900s to 1950s or so. Wherein each empire has a parabolic curve.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GDPC1
Where in that parabolic curve is the USA? It's still pre-top according to an actual source. It's not post-top like Dalio suggests. Debt levels might suggest the USA is getting to their top.
In fact look at that space between the grey recessions. 2009->2020 was a good run. However, what happened there? 8 years of wealth redistribution under Obama. Ray Dalio says that's exactly how to prevent the inevitable pop. Biden just printed how much money for wealth redistribution? That's what ray dalio specifically recommended.
What's another recommendation in the empire game? Education. What do you think happened in the last 10 years? People are smarter today because of the internet and their phone in their pocket. This has already been seen as revolutionary in education.
The USA isn't over their peak. Ray Dalio knows that's true. Now think again about what this video really said.
⬐ AnimalMuppet> Now think again about what this video really said.Don't vaguepost. If you've got a point, say it.
⬐ incomingpain⬐ SV_BubbleTime>Don't vaguepost. If you've got a point, say it.Sorry, you're right. I just figured nobody was reading my post anyway and it was getting long. Obviously I'm not telepathic and don't know dalio knows, but he's a smart dude. I'm sure he looked at real gdp.
It comes down to 'I found a problem that's 40 years out' or whatever #. It's not exciting. There's in fact multiple other huge problems to address first.
Fossil fuel exhaustion, Top soil erosion, End of fertilizers and migration to meat eating, actual climate change thresholds, etc happens sooner. Though obviously none of those are until 10-30 years or so.
It's not that he's blowing his issue out of proportion for $, well maybe he is, but he's saying what has to happen to prevent it and it has to start now. Obviously, education, no deficit spending, and wealth redistribution are his key 3. He's basically parroting Milton Friedman who identified this problem many decades before.
Weapons of mass destruction break his predictions about post-top reality. China will NEVER be able to attack the USA directly. Nukes, bioweapons. Covid lab leak? You think the USA doesn't have something that could easily wipe out asia? We are in a different collapse situation for empires compared to each since QINQ.
⬐ AnimalMuppetThanks. Not vagueposting, then.("Vagueposting", in my book, is when someone wants to hint what their position is, but not actually say it. It's like dogwhistles, except that it's not necessarily about race. They want to attract people toward their position, without being exposed to the criticism that would come from an open statement of it - at least, that's what I suspect their motivation is.
Thinking that your post is getting too long isn't the same thing at all. So, my apologies.)
> People are smarter today because of the internet and their phone in their pocket.Is that so? From where I sit, it doesn’t seem access to the world’s information has been a factor in how “smart” people are at all.
Slight aside, can you look up a single education metric improving since the creation of the Dept of Education?
⬐ shagminAt the very least high school graduation rates have generally gotten better [0]. I don't think people are smarter as in higher IQ, but I wouldn't underestimate how much benefit we've had. I'm sure I'm not the only one that's learned to program from tutorials on the internet. How much productivity has been gained just from stackoverflow alone?1. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brown-center-chalkboard/2020/...
⬐ SV_BubbleTime⬐ incomingpainThat’s not success. They are passing because we refuse to fail them. It would hurt feelings and future success chances.It’s entirely opposite of the point you want to make.
>Is that so? From where I sit, it doesn’t seem access to the world’s information has been a factor in how “smart” people are at all.So there are other factors other than 'smart' like blood pressure, stress, distraction, addictions. I'm not saying mobile phones have not come without troubles.
50 years ago the 'smart' people were your jeopardy folks who had tons of facts memorized. You can just google all those things instead and be just as smart. It is a reality that today someone with a cellphone is tremendously smarter. Better yet, simply having advanced science our facts are even better.
>Slight aside, can you look up a single education metric improving since the creation of the Dept of Education?
When the movie idiocracy came out it was common to show this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect
Not even taking cellphones into effect people are tremendously smarter today.
You're also probably seeking: https://www.oecd.org/education/ where they track these things. They've expanded to other stuff that I don't necessarily agree with but to each their own.
⬐ nradovSmarter how? Whatever you're referring to, it doesn't seem to actually produce better outcomes. The smart people who achieved success 50 years ago certainly didn't do it by memorizing a lot of facts.⬐ incomingpain>Smarter how? Whatever you're referring to, it doesn't seem to actually produce better outcomes. The smart people who achieved success 50 years ago certainly didn't do it by memorizing a lot of facts.I provided a couple big sources. I feel like it's generally considered that education is working well.
Even consider the educational value of youtube. I have a video in my watch later on how to fix a leaning fence.
I'm not sure what you might be asking for.
⬐ nradovYour sources aren't relevant to the point. You haven't established any causality, or even made a plausible case for it. In the US at least, educational outcomes as measured by standardized tests haven't significantly improved.what the article really misses is why this is happening, and it boils down to 3 things: soft power, hard power, and ideal.The decline of soft power was a direct consequence of Washington moving from a pragmatic good-faith actor to a rhetorical dogmatic broken record. nations increasingly couldnt count on washington to meet them on common ground in a disagreement, and instead saw lawmakers ritualistically park the USS blow-you-up carrier off their coast as a crass enforcement of their capitulation. equally onerous was the famed US economic sanction which showed up unannounced for everything from poorly structured oil sales to overly socialist domestic policy. Countries instead bolstered their anti-ship defenses and turned to alternative markets, leaving Washington hollow. The number of countries we currently sanction yet depend on for financing our debt is practically a boys club nodding halfheartedly to US fist-shaking, and the prospect of parking a carrier outside any country worth the dosh is really only enticing if you expect it to patrol the ocean floor a half hour after its arrival.
Hard power is similar. The soviet union was only ever 5-6 years behind the US at best, and so long as you understand your adversary then its pretty easy to counter them. Russia has fifty years of tailor-made doomsday arsenal specifically purposed for deterring the US, which it openly shares with most nations that find themselves in the crosshairs of the stars and bars. similarly, the US hasnt won any of the foreign excursions its found itself since perhaps the first gulf war. Afghanistan was a black eye, Iraq was a road map to a sectarian holocaust, and the combination of low morale and low recruitment has made the US an almost ghostly figure of what it was in the seventies. perhaps the most damning coffin nail here however is that virtually no one in leadership at any level will admit outright that recent wars failed, or that any lessons could be learned.
rounding third base into home we have ideal; its a little intangible at first. The US is a first world nation that struggles with food insecurity, homelessness, healthcare, and a living wage. it holds the worlds highest prison population, routinely shuffles past the weekly gun crime atrocity, and rarely holds its lawbringers to account. you'd move here, but only if it were your last option as housing is unaffordable at any level. Traffic in major cities is unbearable yet somehow no new works projects can ever commence as the might of singular senators gridlocked in endless partisan debate can be enough to torpedo funding entirely. The iris of government seems hopelessly fixed on a forty year old culture war as the doddering gerontocracy we call a legislature tables such groundbreaking resolution as to affirm 'in god we trust' on the dollar, or advance a ban on critical race theory.
⬐ nebula8804⬐ newaccount2021>nations increasingly couldnt count on washington to meet them on common ground in a disagreement, and instead saw lawmakers ritualistically park the USS blow-you-up carrier off their coast as a crass enforcement of their capitulation.This has been happening since the beginning of the US. For example: U.S. presidents refused to recognize Haiti until Abraham Lincoln along with their attempts to establish a military base. It kind of pokes a hole in your theory that there is a decline in soft power if this behavior was also occurring during the US's rise.
>rounding third base into home we have ideal; its a little intangible at first. The US is a first world nation that struggles with food insecurity, homelessness, healthcare, and a living wage. it holds the worlds highest prison population, routinely shuffles past the weekly gun crime atrocity, and rarely holds its lawbringers to account. you'd move here, but only if it were your last option as housing is unaffordable at any level.
You seem to touch upon the topics discussed in Chris Hedges book: America The Farewell Tour.
I also want to point out that the housing market in the US is probably the best out of the disasters occurring in all the other traditional "western" countries like Canada, UK, France, etc. Also China cannot sustain their 1 million dollar+ apartments. That is a massive bubble that will eventually collapse (eg. Evergrande failure)
>Traffic in major cities is unbearable yet somehow no new works projects can ever commence as the might of singular senators gridlocked in endless partisan debate can be enough to torpedo funding entirely.
This seems to be an issue in some states but many other states don't have as serious of restrictions. The issue is not lack of housing, its lack of housing in desired places people want to live in this point in time. (The increase in population of the southern states from people leaving California will change what is the "desired" places to live).
None⬐ lol1lolrich old white jesus of west connecticut⬐ jf22A lot of videos like this are interesting but I believe are mostly 20/20 hindsight overfitting with a mix of whatever theory of the world is popular.Right now "printing money" seems to be the theory of choice so everything wrong with the world is because of printing money.
⬐ jstx1He's trying really hard to come up with some overarching theory by picking some very self-serving examples. At least the advice at the end is pretty reasonable even if not very original - make more than you spend, and be kind to other people.⬐ zeruch"and be kind to other people."That has long been some of the best, and least adhered to, advice anywhere.
Is there an argument, if you zoom far enough out, they are both strategic powerplays one military, one economic, but both with the same aim to increase influence? Especially relevant if you follow the arguments in here about the US being on the decline and China on the ascendency: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xguam0TKMw8It's hard to see how the US's more divisive approach can beat China's more inclusive one. I assume the reasons for this, as mentioned above, tie into the different setups, America with a huge military/industrial complex and China with a much better infrastructure track record (e.g. compare the high speed rail networks in both countries).
Gross simplifications obviously, but maybe the argument still holds?
Disclaimer, not read the WSJ article due to paywall.
I am surprised no one has shared these two important documentary videos on money:Money as Debt: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nBPN-MKefA
Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order by Ray Dalio: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xguam0TKMw8
>I have seen no evidence in support of this. There's plenty of anecdotes of people saying it happened to them, but no evidence of a widespread trend.I hope you are right and I am wrong.
>I remember when "gay" was the insult du jour in middle school.
Still is. Let's go find a random thread on reddit that has nothing to do with sex or gender.
https://www.reddit.com/r/greentext/comments/tm3kd6/anon_has_...
And that's reddit... where there are no conservatives left. They've banned all of us.
>Now high schools are having walkouts in opposition of homophobic laws [1]
School walkouts by children aren't because the students are so well versed and well informed on issues. They were convinced by the teachers to walk out. People who wanted to skip school joins.
In terms of this specific one of 'dont say gay'
https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1557/BillText/er/...
Ctrl + F "gay": 0 results.
Ctrl + F "homo": 0 results.
So frankly the title of 'dont say gay' is propaganda.
So what does it say?
Classroom instruction by school personnel or third 98 parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur 99 in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age 100 appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.
So it's not that they banned saying gay. They banned talking about sexual orientation with children below grade 3. So 8 years old? Do kids younger than 8 years old need to know about sexual orientation as defined by the government? or should parents be responsible here? I say parents, but this is a key political point. There is no objective truth of what is right or wrong on this issue. What should the age be? Age of consent is similar, no one has the answer to what the age of consent should be.
>Did the Republican party start supporting gay marriage while I wasn't looking? Some republicans still feel comfortable questioning interracial marriage.
Not exactly what I said; but its amazing how people are allowed to have differing views. I'm not in or from the USA so I'm not going to defend unnamed random republicans who probably dont represent the party. How about Trump's position: https://www.ontheissues.org/2020/Donald_Trump_Civil_Rights.h...
Ya he went around the world and picked a fight with places like the middle east and russia to fight for gay rights. Seems like Trump was doing the right thing?
That gay marriage is a state issue. Which it very clearly is a state issue.
>Maybe they aren't. Maybe trans people are the important issue here. Maybe people really do believe the things they say they believe, support the things they say they support. It's a comforting thought to deny it, because if attacks on trans people aren't a proxy for some other issue, then it rules out the easy solutions where you can just convince them to stop.
We could go into this if you're interested. We would need primers on the grand debt cycle, the new world order stuff(mainly china becoming #1, good job USA shipping all your factories to china), the USA losing their reserve currency benefits, and the coming probable civil war as indicated by the huge political polarization coming from the democratic party. So for example this 43 minute video covering it only slightly, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xguam0TKMw8
⬐ a_shovel> And that's reddit... where there are no conservatives left.I don't know if that's true. I'd always hear Reddit was more conservative than most other sites.
I've noticed that people of every political alignment think that social media is biased against them. In truth, both sides have prominent figures who would have been banned years ago if they weren't famous enough to get an exception from the rules, both sides have people banned for no good reason, and both sides have people banned for good reasons that they don't think are good reasons. A nuanced study of whether one side is more affected than the other would never survive the heated environment of political social media.
> Ctrl + F "gay": 0 results. Ctrl + F "homo": 0 results.
True and entirely irrelevant. It is easy to make a law that targets a group without directly naming them.
> Do kids younger than 8 years old need to know about sexual orientation?
"Straight" is also a sexual orientation. It is not possible for a child to avoid fairy tales where a prince marries a princess, or ads with a husband and wife in them, or cartoons where a boy and a girl have a crush on each other. So they're gonna know about that one. On the other hand, they might be able to make it to age 8 with minimal exposure to gay couples if their parents are conservative.
Really, it's about whether teachers will be allowed to read a children's book featuring a gay couple to the class. If the principal gets a letter from a lawyer saying a teacher gave age-inappropriate instruction on sexual orientation to first graders, and cited the line of the law forbidding it, then it doesn't matter if the principal supports the teacher. Nor that the "instruction" was just reading a children's book that featured a gay couple; legally, it would likely be considered instruction. Nor that it was entirely age-appropriate; that exception is so vague as to be useless. They can't afford to defend themselves in a lawsuit. So they get rid of the book to make the lawsuit go away. End result is all the books about gay people get thrown out and, if history feels poetic, burned.
(I would also like to note that it has language about requiring schools not to withhold information about the child's health from their parents that seems designed to out transgender and gay children to their parents against their wishes; it too has an exception too vague and limited to be useful.)
⬐ incomingpain>I don't know if that's true. I'd always hear Reddit was more conservative than most other sites.Are most other sites far left? frontpage of reddit routinely promotes far left positions. While conservative subreddits are banned.
>I've noticed that people of every political alignment think that social media is biased against them.
There have been studies which very clearly indicate this is 1 sided. This polarization is coming from the democrats. When 'the_donald" was on reddit. There was regularly >50,000 active on there at any time of the day. It was one of the largest subreddits and was constantly on the front page. Reddit banned them over quite illegitimate reasoning, you cant exactly hold a subreddit responsible because they constantly get brigaded and false flagged. This was the first big purge but they've done it over and over since. Now reddit is more or less an echo chamber for the left. From which many people are studying. The societal consequences are huge.
>In truth, both sides have prominent figures who would have been banned years ago if they weren't famous enough to get an exception from the rules, both sides have people banned for no good reason, and both sides have people banned for good reasons that they don't think are good reasons. A nuanced study of whether one side is more affected than the other would never survive the heated environment of political social media.
On the contrary, these studies are extensive and have been publishing for years. The last time there was this much political polarization in the USA there was a civil war.
Why do you think the republicans are making efforts to 'restrict voting'?: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_efforts_to_restrict...
>more than 425 bills that would restrict voting access have been introduced in 49 states
This is pretty much all states. Very very unusual, why do the republicans think there are voting issues across the country? Ive never seen that before. Then again I do recall Hillary Clinton saying the republicans rigged the election against her. She was certain to win.
>"Straight" is also a sexual orientation. It is not possible for a child to avoid fairy tales where a prince marries a princess, or ads with a husband and wife in them, or cartoons where a boy and a girl have a crush on each other. So they're gonna know about that one. On the other hand, they might be able to make it to age 8 with minimal exposure to gay couples if their parents are conservative.
The parents are responsible to expose their children; not teachers until grade 3. However you just touched on it did you. It has absolutely nothing to do with letting kids know they might be gay. Which is not an important detail before grade 3. This is about politics. This is about forcing this on your political opponents.
>Really, it's about whether teachers will be allowed to read a children's book featuring a gay couple to the class.
Im not american, I havent been to the USA in ages. I have been to Orlando for vacation. I cant recall the big theme park there but ive been there. I dont care what happens in florida to grade 1 kids. I literally linked the law in this case, That's not at all what the law says. Gecko's Garage for example has lesbians characters. Mommy truck and Mommy recycle, this is absolutely allowed in schools at grade 1. Now if geckos garage turned around and did much more? Then it would be wrong.
>If the principal gets a letter from a lawyer saying a teacher gave age-inappropriate instruction on sexual orientation to first graders, and cited the line of the law forbidding it, then it doesn't matter if the principal supports the teacher.
If teachers can't hold back sexual content from grade 1. That teacher needs to be fired. This isn't a good hill to die on for democrats.
> They can't afford to defend themselves in a lawsuit. So they get rid of the book to make the lawsuit go away. End result is all the books about gay people get thrown out and, if history feels poetic, burned.
Lets sideline for a second. Another controversy recently was this nuclear physicist Sam Brinton. Its unimportant if he's qualified for his appointed position for the discussion. I'll even concede and say sure he is qualified, I dont really know tbh.
Why is Sam so controversial? Is it because people really urgently want to promote conversion therapy? No not at all.
Is it because he's occasionally goofy looking? Certainly part of it... but you know taste is subjective.
The controversy is that he's going and having furry bondage sex in public. Obviously done as part of political activism and exhibitionism. This isn't helping the trans cause at all. This is harming it.
>(I would also like to note that it has language about requiring schools not to withhold information about the child's health from their parents that seems designed to out transgender and gay children to their parents against their wishes; it too has an exception too vague and limited to be useful.)
Ive been watching the huge increase of riots in the usa. Various 'occupy' riots. blm race riots like kenosha or minneapolis. I'll even reiterate... these are proper and legitimate riots. Police brutality in the USA is crazy. Clear and obvious racism is objectively true.
These riots have gone into capital buildings and overthrown the government: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Hill_Occupied_Protest
Yet they get called a protest? They literally seized the government. They took control over a police precinct and freed prisoners. It's remarkable how well this protest is being treated by the media and even wiki.
All these riots are left-wing. Then the right-wing protest once... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_United_States_Capitol_att...
This INSURRECTION justified banning trump off twitter. They didnt destroy anything, nor overthrow anything. They entered government buildings for 5 hours. In fact, they mocked exactly what happened at CHOP. Beautiful display to show where the situation is.
There was a huge commission to investigate the first right-wing protest who did far far less than anything BLM ever did. Yet people have been held in prison without charge. Others charged and guilty of sedition and being sent to prison for 20 years. Police were committing mass suicide... absolutely crazy.
This very different reaction by the democrats is very revealing. The polarization from the democrats is a gigantic mistake. Mistake is probably the wrong word, it's far worse than a mistake.
Midterms are coming in what 8 months? Georgia and NC are my main watches. EVERYONE will be looking at transparency of that vote counting. Any impropriety is not going to go well.
⬐ zozbot234> ... Really, it's about whether teachers will be allowed to read a children's book featuring a gay couple to the class. ...Same-sex couples have nothing whatsoever to do with sexual orientation per se. Heterosexual folks can certainly form strong affiliative bonds with friends/associates of the same sex, that are functionally identical to so-called "gay or lesbian couples", though in fact the traditional term is something like "blood brotherhood".
Sexual orientation matters only inasmuch as it describes why some of these pairs might engage in sexual contact (hopefully of the consensual sort) whereas most do not.
Teach kids about blood brotherhood and similar traditional bonds between people of the same sex, and they will be very well equipped (in fact, more so than most!) to understand "gay marriage" later on, when they are able to relate to what is meant by sexual orientation. Traditional culture has the language to talk about all of this stuff, in a way that's appealing and not offputting to conservative concerns, or for that matter "progressive" ones.
What are your thoughts on Ray Dalio's thesis around changing world orders?
⬐ ericmayI think it's very interesting and it's been awhile since I've watched this. If I had to summarize, I think he's correct about overarching principles, but I think the examples and country comparisons are a little underwhelming. I'd also add that what he's describing about American debt is more of a general fiat currency problem and less of an America problem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xguam0TKMw8Unless America can undo its inequality problem within 10 years give or take, it will become financially and politically unstable.
⬐ _448Watch this video after watching the video linked in the original post: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_nGEj8wIP0